Category: Conservation

At what point does a species go from endangered to extinct? Is it when the last individual dies? Or is it when the last individual of one gender dies leaving a lone survivor? This may not seem to be a gun related topic; but, here in California, it is. The State’s attempts to “save the condor” affect hunters in particular and gun owners in general. Laws on lead ammunition will ultimately determine the ammo choices, and costs, that even non-hunters will have when they seek ammunition for self-defense or other non-hunting applications.

The popular view of extinction is the latter of the two listed above. When the last male or the last female dies, breeding another generation becomes impossible. Or does it? Cloning might offer hope, some would argue. But recent studies suggest that it was all over for a particular species long before the last breeding pair was parted. This study of Woolly Mammoth populations shows how a species can pass the point of no return even while there may be hundreds of individuals still alive. (Here’s something of a Cliff Notes version from the NY Times.) The study documents the dramatic loss of genetic diversity in the last known mammoth population.

The last mammoths of Wrangel Island died out about 4000 years ago. The DNA of one individual that died about 300 years before that point was compared to the DNA of a mammoth from Siberia that lived 45,000 year ago. The genetic diversity was about 20% lower in the younger sample and showed signs of multiple, deleterious mutations that would have hindered the ability of the Wrangel Island population to survive changes to their environment. The estimate of the island’s mammoth population 4300 years ago is 300 breeding individuals. (There may have been more individuals present on the island, but only 300 or so were actively breeding.) This proved to be too small a population to sustain the species. Harmful mutations built up and natural selection couldn’t weed them out of so small a population.

In 1987, when the last wild California Condor was captured at the start of the State’s breeding program, there were 27 individuals left in the world. Out of that group, only 13 were breeding individuals. All California Condors alive today are descendants of those original 13. Making matters worse, there’s a very good possibility that all 13 were closely related. If that’s the case, then the entire population of California Condors in the world today is descended from less than 13 birds.

Current law regarding endangered species focuses on simplistic census numbers; how many animals exist. 300 large animals on a 2900 square mile island would seem, by this measure, to be a healthy population. It wasn’t. But laws such as the Endangered Species Act were written before science could accurately describe a species’ genome. It assumes that having more individuals in a population is automatically good. But, if all of these individuals are closely related, then even a large population isn’t healthy and isn’t sustainable. Merely counting heads won’t save a species from extinction.

The question to be asked about new or existing laws here in California isn’t “Will this save the condors?”, but rather “Is saving the condors even possible anymore?”. Arguably, the answer to that question is “no”. Gymnogyps californianus is already extinct when one considers their genome. But all of this goes further than condors. Recent studies have shown that some “endangered” wolf species aren’t wolves; they’re coyote hybrids. Under current law, this means that they’re not endangered at all.

It’s time for the law to catch up to science. More than nose counting must be done to determine which species need protection, which do not, and which are beyond hope; and thus, where we should spend our finite government resources. Attempting to save an already extinct species or a hybrid population isn’t a good way to spend the People’s money. Worse yet, we hurt species that can be preserved with these quixotic attempts to “save” extinct species and hybrid populations.

Like this:

Chef Ramsay posted this clip from his visit to Ft. Benning, GA, of a hog hunt on the base…

It’s Chef Ramsay, so the usual warnings about language apply!

Don’t get me wrong: The 2nd Amendment isn’t about sporting goods. You might be able to buy a gun at Big-5 or Walmart, but this doesn’t put firearms in the same category as a yoga mat or roller blades. That being said, there are many of us in the gun owning community that see firearms as kitchen tools. For us, food prep begins at the target range.

Some of you West Coast latte-sippers may find all of this appalling. You’ve possibly wondered aloud why hunters can’t shoot cameras instead of guns. Perhaps you’ve even done so over dinner. So where did that cut of meat come from?

You would do well to remember that the forests and other wild spaces you enjoy on the weekends are largely funded by taxes that us “rednecks” pay when we buy guns and ammo. The next time you’re tempted to sneer at an F-250 with a rifle rack in the back window, remember that the driver puts more into the environment than you and your Prius do. You and he (or, increasingly, she) both eat meat, but the driver of that F-250 is willing to do the killing and butchering himself rather than paying someone else to do the dirty work.

Like this:

No, not those California turkeys; the ones that roam the halls of the State Capitol. I’m talking about Meleagris gallopavo.

Wild turkeys were introduced into the State starting about 100 years ago with mixed success. These were initially farm-raised birds that didn’t fare well in the wild. But starting in 1959, true, wild caught birds were introduced from Texas and these have established themselves here. Now environmentalists have begun some predictable handwringing. (Never mind that it’s far too late to actually do anything about the birds!)

Before the arrival of European settlers with their hunting, forest clearing and timber extraction, flocks of hundreds of wild turkeys could be found throughout North America. By the start of the twentieth century, they were on the brink of extinction. Through conservation and reintroduction efforts, however, they recovered and today, although not quite as many as the ten million estimated during the 1600s, they number about six million and are resident in every state except Alaska. While this proliferation has been deemed a great conservation story by many—maybe even the greatest wildlife conservation success of the last century—there is considerable debate surrounding the introduction of wild turkeys into California and their place in its landscape.

M. gallopavo isn’t native to California. There was once a native species, M. californica, but it died out 10-12 thousand years ago; a time roughly corresponding to the Younger Dryas period. This same period saw an end to much of the megafauna in North America. This also marks the beginning of the end for the California Condor, a functionally extinct species that was designed to feed off of the carcasses of megafauna. It’s possible that a comet impact event triggered the sudden cooling in the Northern Hemisphere that marked the Younger Dryas. M. gallopavo now seems to be reestablishing the old ecological niche once occupied by M. californica, but possibly to the detriment of those species that began to adapt to the vacancy.

Of course, the greenies are doing what greenies do: They’re churning out studies. But to their dismay, not all of the studies support the something-must-be-done point of view. (A point of view that gives them a shot at employment after they’ve run out of post-graduate classes to take, by the way.) For example, one study suggests that turkeys and quail have no problem coexisting, even though they eat some of the same things. Another contradicts suggestions that the birds are spreading Sudden Oak Death. It also dismisses claims that they’re eating endangered species or causing habitat destruction. Still, the something-must-be-done camp tells us that something must be done. They don’t say what that something is in particular, but one of the somethings you don’t see them suggesting is hunting. (Shocked? Neither was I.)

So for those Californian’s interested in supporting biodiversity and a providing lovely dinner, the spring turkey season is just around the corner.

Hunters’ Guide to Complying with California’s New Lead Ammunition Restrictions

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2015

The National Rifle Association (NRA) and its affiliate, the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA), are now distributing the Hunters’ Guide to Complying With California’s Lead Ammunition Restrictions. This helpful and important guide serves as a comprehensive resource for hunters who need to know about California’s lead ammunition restrictions. The guide will aid hunters in navigating California’s complex lead ammunition regulations especially when using traditional lead ammunition for hunting while it remains legal in certain areas for a limited time.

As previously reported, the new law will require the use of non-lead ammunition for all hunting statewide beginning July 1, 2019. In the years leading up to the total statewide ban, lead ammunition use for hunting will be incrementally restricted in phases. The guide explains each of the three phases in detail, and will help hunters comply with these patchwork restrictions as they take effect.

The guide’s centerpiece is the Phased Implementation Lead Ban Compliance Table, which can be used as a quick reference to determine whether a particular hunt will require using non-lead ammunition. Other portions of the guide detail the potential issues arising from using lead ammunition, as well as some of the law’s more subtle nuances that create legal traps for the unwary.

The NRA and CRPA have made the Guide available to the public free of charge. We recommend that you always consult the electronic, rather than a printed version of the guide because regulations may change and the guide may be updated. If you do not see the answer to a question you have or believe there is an error in this guide, please provide feedback to: contact@crpa.org.

Help Us Help You

Please help us fight for your right to choose to own a gun for sport, or to defend yourself and your family. TheNRA and CRPA work together in California to fight for you, in cities and counties across the state, in regulatory agencies, and in the courts. Even with the generous rates that our team of civil rights attorneys, legislative advocates, experts and consultants grant us, these ongoing efforts are still expensive. You can support our pro-Second Amendment efforts in California by donating to the NRA Legal Action Project. All donations will be spent to specifically benefit California gun owners.

Second Amendment supporters should be careful about supporting litigation or other efforts promised by individuals and groups that lack the experience, resources, skill, or legal talent to be successful. The NRA and CRPA’s national team of highly regarded civil rights attorneys, legislative advocates, and scholars has the experience, resources, skill and expertise needed to maximize the potential for victory in California’s often hostile political environments.

For a summary of current and recent actions NRA and CRPA have taken on behalf of California gun owners, including the groundbreaking Peruta case, click here. To read about some of the past actions NRA and CRPA have taken in the fight for your Second Amendment rights in California, click here.

California: D-Day is Looming for Several Anti-Gun/Anti-Hunting Bills Pending in the state Senate and Assembly

Posted on September 8, 2013

Contact your state Senator and Assemblyman DAILY this week — State Legislature Adjourns this Friday

This week is the final week of the 2013 legislative session. There are several anti-gun bills and an anti-hunting bill with seriously consequences for gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporter awaiting their final vote on the floors of the state Senate and Assembly before adjournment of the California Legislature on Friday, September 13. These misguided anti-gun/anti-hunting bills could be up for its final vote on any day and at any time this week.

Don’t let your state Senator and Assemblyman think their constituents support this anti-gun/anti-hunting legislation. To ensure that your state Senator and Assemblyman know that their district have many pro-gun constituents you MUST contact them daily this week making your pro-gun voice heard. Contact information for your state Senator and Assemblyman can be found here.

You MUST also remind your family, friends, fellow gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters that they must do the same EVERY DAY next week.

The Golden State needs all law-abiding Californians contacting their state legislators to save the Second Amendment in Sacramento.

The following four Assembly bills have passed in the Assembly and are now on the floor of the state Senate. Please urge your state Senator to OPPOSE and VOTE AGAINST these anti-gun bills.

Assembly Bill 48 (Skinner) bans the sale of parts and repair kits capable of converting magazine capacity to greater than ten rounds. This bill also requires that any person who purchases 6,000 rounds of ammunition within a five-day period be reported to local law enforcement.

Assembly Bill 169 (Dickinson) bans the sale and transfer of all lawfully acquired firearms that were never, or are no longer, on the California roster of approved handguns.

Assembly Bill 231 (Ting) expands the law relating to the storage of firearms. This bill does nothing to reduce California’s violent crime problem and only turns law-abiding gun owners into criminals whether or not anything harmful actually happens, and regardless of whether there was any misconduct on the part of the gun owner. Ultimately, AB 231 is a misguided proposal that imposes unprecedented liability on those who choose to exercise their fundamental right to keep and bear arms.

Assembly Bill 711 would make California the first state in the nation to prohibit the use of ALL lead ammunition for hunting. Extensive research has shown that traditional lead ammunition does NOT pose a health hazard for hunters. Pleasecommunicate the following facts to your Senator as reasons to OPPOSE AB 711:

Federal and state health department studies have concluded that lead ammunition is not a human health risk, and a recently released peer reviewed study out of Sweden indicates that there is no human health risk to people who consume wild game harvested with lead ammunition.

Despite 99% hunter compliance, the AB 821 lead ammunition ban has failed to reduce lead poisoning in condors.

AB 711 fails to address the alternative sources of lead in the environment that are poisoning condors and other wildlife.

Even if one is not a hunter, recreational shooter or gun owner, those who enjoy nature by bird-watching, hiking or camping benefit from hunting excise tax dollars through the Pittman-Robertson Act. According to the California Department of Finance, AB 711 could cost California $34 MILLION in lost revenue and federal funding, not the $45,000 claimed by lead ammunition ban advocates. That is only the tip of the iceberg. The state Department of Finance figure does not include loss of jobs, reduction in taxes from decreasing hunting-related expenditures or the likely increase in cost to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to hire more wardens to enforce the lead ammunition ban.
Lead ammunition ban advocates will not stop until all traditional ammunition and hunting is banned across the United States. The President and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States, Wayne Pacelle, has been quoted as saying: “We are going to use the ballot box and the democratic process to stop all hunting in the United States. We will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped in California. Then we will take it state by state.” Californians CANNOT afford to let this happen!

The following seven Senate bills have passed in the state Senate and are now on the floor of the state Assembly. Please urge your state Assemblyman to OPPOSE and VOTE AGAINST these anti-gun bills.

Senate Bill 53 (De León) bans the online and mail order purchase of all ammunition and requires registration and thumbprinting for all ammunition sales. Further, SB 53 requires that all ammunition purchasers pay a fee (tax) to obtain an annual ammunition purchase permit.

Senate Bill 299 (DeSaulnier) makes it a crime if a victim of firearm theft does not report the theft within 48 hours.

Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg) bans the future sale or transfer of and classify ALL semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine or holding more than ten rounds of ammunition as “assault weapons.” Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL your semi-autos newly classified as “assault weapons.”

Senate Bill 396 (Hancock) bans the possession of ALL magazines over ten rounds, including the millions of “grandfathered” standard capacity magazines currently legally possessed by Californians.

Senate Bill 567 (Jackson) redefines shotguns to include any firearm that may be fired through a rifled bore or a smooth bore, regardless of whether it is designed to be fired from the shoulder. SB 567 also bans the sale of shotguns encompassed by the revised definitions that have a revolving cylinder, and requires registration of these currently owned shotguns.

Senate Bill 683 (Block) expands California’s handgun safety certificate requirement to apply to all firearms, and prohibits anyone from purchasing or transferring any firearm without a firearm safety certificate.

Senate Bill 755 (Wolk) expands the list of persons prohibited from owning a firearm, including persons who have operated cars and boats while they are impaired commonly referred to as DUI.

Unfortunately, the two anti-gun bills below have passed in both the state Senate and Assembly, and will soon be sent to the Governor for his consideration. Even though these anti-gun bills are soon going to the Governor, we ask you to concentrate on calling your state Senator and Assemblyman urging them to OPPOSE the anti-gun bills listed above and helping stop their passage. Contact information for your state Senator and Assemblyman can be found here.

Assembly Bill 180 (Bonta) repeals state firearms preemption by allowing the City of Oakland to enact ordinances that are more restrictive than state laws concerning the registration or licensing of firearms.

Senate Bill 475 (Leno) effectively bans gun shows at the Cow Palace by requiring approval of the board of supervisors of the Counties of San Mateo and San Francisco prior to any gun shows.

Like this:

As promised, here’s the update on legislation here in the Fool’s Golden State…

From NRA-ILA:

California: Anti-Gun Bills Now Go to the state Senate and Assembly Floors

Posted on August 30, 2013

Contact your state Senator and Assemblyman EVERY DAY!

Today, both the state Senate and Assembly Appropriations Committees passed several anti-gun and one anti-hunting bill by party-line votes. These misguided anti-gun/anti-hunting bills now go to the floor of the state Senate and Assembly, and could be up for a final vote at anytime.

Time is now very short to stop these egregious bills!

You MUST call AND e-mail your state Senate and Assemblyman EVERY DAY respectfully urging them to OPPOSE all anti-gun legislation. You MUST also remind your family, friends, fellow gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters that they must do the same EVERY DAY. The Golden State will need all its law-abiding citizens contacting their state legislators to save the Second Amendment.

Your state Senator and Assemblyman think their constituents are not pro-gun and they use that excuse every time they vote for anti-gun/anti-hunting legislation. To ensure that your state Senator and Assemblyman know that their district is full of pro-gun constituents you MUST contact them daily reminding them that you want your pro-gun voice heard. Contact information for your state Senator and Assemblyman can be found here.

The following bills are now on the floor of the state Senate:

Assembly Bill 48 (Skinner) bans the sale of parts and repair kits capable of converting magazine capacity to greater than ten rounds. This bill would also require that any person who purchases 6,000 rounds of ammunition within a five day period be reported to local law enforcement.

Assembly Bill 169 (Dickinson) bans the sale and transfer of all lawfully acquired firearms that were never, or are no longer, on the California roster of approved handguns.

Assembly Bill 180 (Bonta) repeals state firearms preemption by allowing the City of Oakland to enact ordinances that are more restrictive than state laws concerning the registration or licensing of firearms.

Assembly Bill 231 (Ting) expands the law relating to the storage of firearms. This bill does nothing to reduce California’s violent crime problem and only turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals whether or not anything harmful actually happens, and regardless of whether there was any misconduct on the part of the gun owner. Ultimately, AB 231 is a misguided proposal that imposes unprecedented liability on those who choose to exercise their fundamental right to keep and bear arms.

Assembly Bill 711 (Rendon) makes California the first state in the nation to prohibit the use of all lead ammunition for hunting.

The following bills are now on the floor of the state Assembly:

Senate Bill 53 (De León) bans the online and mail order purchase of all ammunition and requires registration and thumbprinting for all ammunition sales. Further, SB 53 requires that all ammunition purchasers pay a fee (tax) to obtain an annual ammunition purchase permit.

Senate Bill 299 (DeSaulnier) makes it a crime if a victim of firearm theft does not report the theft within 48 hours.

Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg) bans the future sale or transfer of and classify ALL semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine or holding more than ten rounds of ammunition as “assault weapons.” Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL your semi-autos newly classified as “assault weapons.”

Senate Bill 396 (Hancock) bans the possession of ALL magazines over ten rounds, including the millions of “grandfathered” standard capacity magazines currently legally possessed by Californians.

Senate Bill 475 (Leno) effectively bans gun shows at the Cow Palace by requiring approval of the board of supervisors of the Counties of San Mateo and San Francisco prior to any gun shows.

Senate Bill 567 (Jackson) redefines shotguns to include any firearm that may be fired through a rifled bore or a smooth bore, regardless of whether it is designed to be fired from the shoulder. SB 567 also bans the sale of shotguns encompassed by the revised definitions that have a revolving cylinder, and requires registration of these currently owned shotguns.

Senate Bill 683 (Block) expands California’s handgun safety certificate requirement to apply to all firearms, and prohibits anyone from purchasing or transferring any firearm without a firearm safety certificate.

Senate Bill 755 (Wolk) expands the list of persons prohibited from owning a firearm, including persons who have operated cars and boats while they are impaired commonly referred to as DUI.

On a good note, the following anti-gun bills were held in committee and are defeated for the year:

Senate Bill 47 (Yee) bans the use of a “bullet button” on semi-automatic rifles to comply with current law by classifying firearms with “bullet buttons” as “assault weapons” and banning their future sale or transfer. Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL of your semi-autos with “bullet buttons.”

Senate Bill 293 (DeSaulnier) prohibits new handguns that are not “smart guns” (aka “owner-authorized handguns”) from being added to CA’s roster of approved handguns once two “smart guns” become available for sale.

There is still time to call AND e-mail your state Senator and Assemblyman urging them to OPPOSE all anti-gun/anti-hunting legislation listed above. Don’t forget to forward this alert to your family, friends, fellow gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters across California.

Like this:

Sorry about going dark on you! Like a lot of you, we were out shooting at doves this weekend…

Long story, short: The crazies in Sacramento passed nearly everything out of the Senate and Assembly Appropriations Committees on Friday. I’ll have more details for you later.

Now back to the dove hunting…

A lot of you spent your Labor Day weekend shooting at little, flying cocktail weenies. I’m betting that you went through quite a few shells too. And, of course, those shells were loaded with lead shot. Now the greenies may howl about the lead, but your local firefighters are probably very happy that you were using lead rather than steel. How dry was the brush where you were hunting? It was pretty dry where I was at. One little spark, as what might be seen from steel shot hitting a stone, and the birds would have come precooked!

So why do I mention this? One of the bills that’s now headed for the Senate floor is AB711; the state wide lead ammo ban. This bill would mandate the use of non-lead ammo for ail hunting in California. Never mind that it’s not scientifically justifiable, it threatens to burn off more of the State’s wilderness areas. And to think that they voted to do this when they could probably look out a window and see the smoke from the Rim Fire!

Now is the time for you to contact your legislators in Sacramento and urge them to put a stop to this nonsense. Banning lead ammo will only hurt the environment.

I submit to you that the average hunter cares far more about the environment than does the average Birkenstock wearing, Prius driving, half-caf soy latte sipping, gun hating, Bay area liberal. Why? To Mr. Treehugger, the forest is a place he saw on PBS. To the hunter, it’s place he takes his family. He gets food there. He feels closer to God there. Why wouldn’t he support a measure advertised as something to protect such a place? Because it doesn’t do that.

Banning lead ammo will not protect a single California condor. Nor will it protect any of the other species in our State. It will, however, start more fires. Copper ammo will poison more fish. And the expensive “non-toxic” ammo will keep hunters out of the field. This last consequence is the worst. Human hunters are part of this ecosystem and have been for millennia. And like any other predator, removing them hurts the environment.

Like this:

… and somehow it’s the NRA who’s at fault. But you knew that was coming, didn’t you?

Huff-n-Puff’s Christina Wilkie is understandably upset and confused that the NRA is opposing those on the Left who are intent upon promoting their religion using the public’s money. Apparently, she thought that the Eeeeeevil NRA™ would see the light, repent its sins, and support a ban on lead ammo. But alas, we believe in real science, not Greenie superstition dressed up as science. (Sorry, we’re just not into cosplay!)

The object of Ms. Wilkie’s fervent ire is HuntForTruth.org. But judging by what she wrote, she didn’t get past the site’s front page. Had she done so, she might have noticed the real science. The truth is that California condors are not being poisoned by lead ammo. The data are inconsistent with that theory. Some other source of lead is poisoning them, but the Greenie religion forbids such a conclusion. “It has to be ammo! It has to be those evil rednecks!”

The unpleasant reality is that the California condor is past saving. It’s gone through a severe genetic bottleneck and there’s no bringing it back. The species is already extinct; we’re just waiting for the last of them to die out. This is an unstoppable process and it began at the end of the last ice age. Lead ammo had nothing to do with it. Thus banning lead ammo won’t stop the unstoppable. The religion of the anti-gun Left may say otherwise, but science says the birds are finished.

Like this:

To provide justification for the lead ammo ban in this State’s “Kondor Kountry”, Section 3004.5 (d) of the California Fish & Game Code reads:

“…(d) The commission shall issue a report on the levels of lead
found in California condors. This report shall cover calendar years
2008, 2009, and 2012. Each report shall be issued by June of the
following year…”

But as Tony Canales points out, June of 2013 has come and gone without such a report. And, it doesn’t look like one will emerge anytime soon. Could it be that the data for the 2012 report aren’t saying what the Kondor Kiddies wanted to hear? This would be especially unfortunate for them given that they’re still pushing AB 711, the Statewide lead ammo ban. Kinda hard to argue for an expanded ban when the data show no effect from the regional ban.

California: Two Anti-Gun Bills with Serious Consequences Scheduled to be Heard on Tuesday

Posted on June 6, 2013

Please contact your state Senator and Senate Committee Members TODAY

On Tuesday, June 11, two anti-gun bills are scheduled to be heard in the state Senate Public Safety Committee and the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee. Both of these bills have already passed in the state Assembly and MUST be stopped in the state Senate. Please call AND e-mail members of these Senate committees TODAY. Members of these Senate committees MUST hear that YOU OPPOSE these bills! Contact information for members of these Senate committees is provided below.

In the state Senate Public Safety Committee:

Assembly Bill 169 (Dickinson) would prohibit the transfer of millions of lawfully owned handguns and jeopardize the continued ownership of constitutionally protected firearms. Current California law allows handguns that are not on the state Department of Justice (DOJ) approved handgun roster to be sold or transferred to another individual through consignment sale or as a private party transfer, provided that the sale is completed through a licensed firearms retailer. AB 169 would BAN the sale of ALL handguns (NEW and USED) that are NOT on the DOJ approved roster of “safe” handguns.

There are MILLIONS of handguns that were manufactured and/or purchased prior to the enactment of the DOJ approved handgun roster law. Most of the handguns lawfully possessed in California today, are not currently on the California Department of Justice (DOJ) approved handgun roster of new handguns that licensed dealers are allowed to sell to the public nor will those handguns ever be allowed to be added to the “approved” roster. If enacted, AB 169 would leave gun owners who lawfully purchased a handgun with no legal means to sell or transfer their handgun.

In the state Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee:

Assembly Bill 711 (Rendon) would make California the first state in the nation to prohibit the use of lead ammunition for ALL hunting. Such a ban on traditional ammunition would have devastating effects on hunting and conservation. You cannot let this happen! Many hunters would not be able to afford the higher cost of non-traditional ammunition.

Please forward this alert to family, friends and sportsmen throughout California because it is going to take a united effort to stop these egregious and misguided legislation.

You can write your representative hereurging them to OPPOSE the anti-gun bills listed above. Please feel free to also copy and paste all the bill information to ensure your state legislators know which bills to OPPOSE.

You can also find information about anti-gun and pro-gun legislation in California at www.calnra.com.

Help NRA Get Californians Connected with NRA’s California Resources

Help the NRA expand its California network to keep all pro-Second Amendment Californians better informed about legislation in Congress, Sacramento, and locally that threatens your right to keep and bear arms, as well as developments in Second Amendment litigation and regulatory enforcement actions. Please forward this email to your family, friends and fellow gun owners, whether they belong to the NRA or not! Encourage them to sign up for California NRA’s Stayed Informed e-mails here. And follow NRA through these additional connections:

The NRA recognizes that California is one of the most active Second Amendment “battleground states,” so for decades NRA has devoted substantial resources to fighting for the right to keep and bear arms for Californians. The NRA has full-time legislative advocates in its Sacramento office fighting ill-conceived gun ban proposals. NRA coordinates a statewide campaign to fight ill-conceived local gun bans and regulations. And NRA has been litigating cases in California courts to promote the right to self-defense and the Second Amendment for many years. NRA’s California legal team continues to work pro-actively to strike down ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances, and to protect the Second Amendment rights of California firearms owners. For information about NRA’s litigation efforts, see www.nraila.org/legal/litigation.aspx

To donate to help support the NRA’s California efforts,please clickhere.